Investigating factors that improve golf scores by comparing statistics of amateur golfers in repeat scramble strokes and one-ball conditions
Keywords:Performance analysis, Non-professional golfers, Greens in regulation, Putt rate
This study investigated how scores and statistics of amateur golfers changed when self-scramble (SC) was compared to normal play. Participants took two (SC2) to three (SC3) golf strokes each. Scores under these conditions were compared with those from normal round (NR) play to determine to what extent the scores and statistics would improve. Means, standard deviations, repeated measures one-way ANOVA, and a forward stepwise multiple regression analysis were performed for data analysis. The mean total score over nine holes by NR plays was 46.6 strokes, with a significant reduction of 7.7 strokes and 10.6 strokes under SC2 and SC3 conditions, respectively. Even when the three play conditions’ total scores decreased significantly for all subjects, the putt rate was around 38%, suggesting that the ratio of the number of putts per score did not change when play conditions changed. Stepwise multiple regression analysis for NR and SC2 using total score as the dependent variable and each statistic as the independent variables showed that greens in regulation (GIR) predicted 51.2% of the total score for NR; GIR and the One-Putt rate predicted 87.3% of the total score for SC2. These findings indicate that GIR is the most important factor for reducing non-professional golfers’ total scores. This study suggests that players gain experience in reducing their golf scores in a format that is similar to an actual game of golf.
Broadie, M. (2012). Assessing golfer performance on the PGA TOUR. Interfaces, 42(2), 146–165. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.1120.0626
Broadie, M. (2014). Every shot counts: Using the revolutionary strokes gained approach to improve your golf performance and strategy. New York, NY: Penguin Group.
Broadie, M. (2019). Quantifying the penalty for missing on the short side. https://www.golf.com/instruction/2019/02/26/mark-broadie-new-pga-tour-stats-statistic-short-sided-index
Broadie, M., & Ko, S. (2009, December). A simulation model to analyze the impact of distance and direction on golf scores. Paper presented ath the Proceedings of the 2009 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), Austin, TX. https://doi.org/10.1109/wsc.2009.5429280
Browning, R. (2018). A history of golf: The royal and ancient game. Whitefish, MT: Literary Licensing, LLC.
Chae, J. S., Park, J., & So, W. Y. (2018). Ranking prediction model using the competition record of ladies professional golf association players. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 32(8), 2363–2374. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000002018
Dorsel, T. N., & Rotunda, R. J. (2001). Low scores, top 10 finishes, and big money: An analysis of professional golf association tour statistics and how these relate to overall performance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 92(2), 575–585. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.2001.92.2.575
Fried, H. O., Lambrinos, J., & Tyner, J. (2004). Evaluating the performance of professional golfers on the PGA, LPGA and SPGA tours. European Journal of Operational Research, 154(2), 548–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00188-7
Hasegawa, Y., Koyama, S., & Inomata, K. (2013). Perceived distance during golf putting. Human Movement Science, 32(6), 1226–1238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2013.02.003
Ishikura, T. (2010). Learner–regulated feedback enhances ball putting learning. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 32, S89–S89.
Karlsen, J., & Nilsson, J. (2008). Distance variability in golf putting among highly skilled players: The role of green reading. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 3(1_suppl), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1260/174795408785024333
Lee, T., Ishikura, T., Kegel, S., Gonzalez, D., & Passmore, S. (2008, 07/01). Head–putter coordination patterns in expert and less skilled golfers. Journal of Motor Behavior, 40, 267–272. https://doi.org/10.3200/JMBR.40.4.267-272
McDaniel, K. D., Cummings, J. L., & Shain, S. (1989). The “yips” A focal dystonia of golfers. Neurology, 39(2), 192–192. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.39.2.192
Pelz, D., & Mastroni, N. (2004). Putt like the pros: Dave Pelz's scientific way to improving your stroke, reading greens, and lowering your score. London, UK: Aurum.
Pfitzner, C. B., & Rishel, D. T. (2005). Performance and compensation on the LPGA tour: a statistical analysis. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 5(3), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/24748668.2005.11868335
PGA TOUR Champions, PGA TOUR Inc. (2018a). Categories-Approach the green. https://www.pgatour.com/stats/categories.RAPP_INQ.html
PGA TOUR Champions, PGA TOUR Inc. (2018b). Statistics » Around the green » Scrambling. https://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.130.html
PGA TOUR Champions, PGA TOUR Inc. (2018c). Statistics » Putting » One-Putt Percentage. https://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.413.html
PGA TOUR Champions, PGA TOUR Inc. (2018d). Statistics » Putting » Putts Per Round. https://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.119.y2018.html
R&A. (2019). The Official Guidebook to the Rules of Golf. Hamlyn.
Sams, L. D. (2015). Perceptual differences in children learning to play golf with traditional or modified (scaled) equipment (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Arkansas, Fayetteville.
Smith, A. M., Adler, C. H., Crews, D., Wharen, R. E., Laskowski, E. R., Barnes, K., & Smith, J. (2003). The 'yips' in golf: a continuum between a focal dystonia and choking. Sports Medicine, 33(1), 13–31. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200333010-00002
Stöckl, M., Lamb, P., & Lames, M. (2013). The ISOPAR method: A new approach to performance analysis in golf. Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, 7, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.2202/1559-0410.1289
Stöckl, M., & Lamb, P. F. (2018). The variable and chaotic nature of professional golf performance. Journal of Sports Sciences, 36(9), 978–984. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2017.1347269
Suzuki, T., Manabe, Y., Arakawa, H., Sheahan, J. P., Okuda, I., & Ichikawa, D. (2019). A comparison of stroke distance error from dominant and non-dominant putting stance in professional and novice golfers. International Journal of Golf Science, 7(1), 1–15.
Tanaka, Y., & Sekiya, H. (2010). The influence of audience and monetary reward on the putting kinematics of expert and novice golfers. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 81(4), 416–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2010.10599702
Tanaka, Y., & Sekiya, H. (2011). The influence of monetary reward and punishment on psychological, physiological, behavioral and performance aspects of a golf putting task. Human Movement Science, 30(6), 1115–1128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2011.04.008
Toms, M. (2017). Routledge international handbook of golf science. London, UK: Routledge.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2018 Journal of Human Sport and Exercise
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Each author warrants that his or her submission to the Work is original and that he or she has full power to enter into this agreement. Neither this Work nor a similar work has been published elsewhere in any language nor shall be submitted for publication elsewhere while under consideration by JHSE. Each author also accepts that the JHSE will not be held legally responsible for any claims of compensation.
Authors wishing to include figures or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright holder(s) and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.
Please include at the end of the acknowledgements a declaration that the experiments comply with the current laws of the country in which they were performed. The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the abovementioned requirements. The author(s) will be held responsible for false statements or failure to fulfill the above-mentioned requirements.
This title is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
You are free to share, copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
Transfer of Copyright
In consideration of JHSE’s publication of the Work, the authors hereby transfer, assign, and otherwise convey all copyright ownership worldwide, in all languages, and in all forms of media now or hereafter known, including electronic media such as CD-ROM, Internet, and Intranet, to JHSE. If JHSE should decide for any reason not to publish an author’s submission to the Work, JHSE shall give prompt notice of its decision to the corresponding author, this agreement shall terminate, and neither the author nor JHSE shall be under any further liability or obligation.
Each author certifies that he or she has no commercial associations (e.g., consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article, except as disclosed on a separate attachment. All funding sources supporting the Work and all institutional or corporate affiliations of the authors are acknowledged in a footnote in the Work.
Each author certifies that his or her institution has approved the protocol for any investigation involving humans or animals and that all experimentation was conducted in conformity with ethical and humane principles of research.
Biomedical journals typically require authors and reviewers to declare if they have any competing interests with regard to their research.
JHSE require authors to agree to Copyright Notice as part of the submission process.